JB-Singapore Rapid Transit System

[ddes]

I know one day air capacity will be a problem, especially if airlines plans are realized, for eg, AirAsia wishing to have 20 daily, Jetstar looking at 7 daily, Tiger looking for a similar number, along with current SQ and MH flights.

Besides that, I can bet Garuda will definitely want to have a piece of the pie, rumours floating that BA may fly to KUL via SIN.

Trains are definitely a better option but here in Southeast Asia, airlines are still regarded as crown jewels of the governments (no matter private or state-owned). Southeast Asian governments are still not ready to give up the slightest bit of real sovereignty for the good of the public yet.

[JediAlf]

Originally Posted by ddes

I know one day air capacity will be a problem, especially if airlines plans are realized, for eg, AirAsia wishing to have 20 daily, Jetstar looking at 7 daily, Tiger looking for a similar number, along with current SQ and MH flights.

Besides that, I can bet Garuda will definitely want to have a piece of the pie, rumours floating that BA may fly to KUL via SIN.

Trains are definitely a better option but here in Southeast Asia, airlines are still regarded as crown jewels of the governments (no matter private or state-owned). Southeast Asian governments are still not ready to give up the slightest bit of real sovereignty for the good of the public yet.

Asia has larger populations to sustain flights and rail services. Just that their cities need to revamp their infrastructures to handle larger volumes in surging once transport systems start to improve by leaps and bounds.

The capacity is not a major issue. Because there are many large airports in operational or being under construction in Asia - not fully used or reached the limits yet.

This would also justify the construction of Terminal 3 and planning of Terminal 4 at Changi. Changi Airport has not even reached above 100% capacity.

Changi Airport is well positioned to handle any volumes of passengers and the planes.

[Augusto]

Originally Posted by JediAlf

Not baseless. This is well documented in dispute between Singapore and Malaysia. Malaysia officers insisted using overhead power lines while Singapore officers said no to these trains in open space in Singapore and suggested to them that the Malaysians build tunnels instead. These officers do not compromise. So in end, we commuters do not get what we want.

Generally overhead power line is cheaper than third rail. Hence, it is very popular in many countries.

So naturally Malaysia would prefer the overhead power lines for inter-city rail network.

Not really baseless as you may think. It is all about beauty and the safety.

If third rail is used for inter-city where they will pass through many villages and towns. So it would be potentially dangerous if kids happen to go and come in contact with third rail which is very close to the ground - more accessible. There are many train crosses here and there. Power supply needs to be re-connected and dig out grounds and bury the missing connection to allow vehicles to cross.

Overhead lines is continuous - no need to dig out the ground and bury electrical cables. It is hung higher. So kids would not be able to reach unless they climb up poles. Vehicles can cross easily. Safety issues. If you notice, many parts where electrified lines are not heavily covered with trees that can potentially damage the cables.

Third rail is used for subway to make it look pleasing to eyes when the trains emerge on viaducts. There is no way for public to come in contact with third rail in subway which is exclusively closed to the public access to rail tracks whereas the inter-city lines can allow the public to access or even touch rail tracks.



Baseless? No.

Generally both countries already indicates their preferences.

I never understood the problem Singapore had with overhead cables. In some of the nicest cities in world there are tram and trolley cables: the Ring road in Wien, city center in Bern, Roma, Milano, Lisboa, St Petersburg,..
Singapore is nice but not exactly a beautiful city (no offence) and it's already full of huge lamp post, ERP post, flyover, advertisements,.. And we're not talking about a street tram but about a railway that would probably be partially underground or a least below ground level.
Is it really only for aesthetic reasons?
Anyway the rolling stock could easily have both 3rd rail and overhead supply: the Eurostar used to be like that and many trains in UK (London suburban), the Netherlands (Amsterdam Sneltram) and France (Chamonix-Martigny) use both supply.

[mrtfreak]

@ Jedi: You missed my point. Urban rail 3rd rail and inter-city/commuter rail overhead. Of course Malaysia would want to use overhead for the KTM line since the rest of Peninsular Malaysia's national rail system uses overhead wires. But when it is a metro-style transit system (KL's LRT, Monorail), they also do use third rail. So its not to say that Malaysia is fully overhead lines. It would make sense to have it third rail if they do want the MRT to go to JB as well.

[JediAlf]

Originally Posted by mrtfreak

@ Jedi: You missed my point. Urban rail 3rd rail and inter-city/commuter rail overhead. Of course Malaysia would want to use overhead for the KTM line since the rest of Peninsular Malaysia's national rail system uses overhead wires. But when it is a metro-style transit system (KL's LRT, Monorail), they also do use third rail. So its not to say that Malaysia is fully overhead lines. It would make sense to have it third rail if they do want the MRT to go to JB as well.

Same for Singapore. It also has NEL using overhead lines.

"Favour" in dictionary terms - meaning liking or approve. Obviously there is no baseless here.

[JediAlf]

Originally Posted by Augusto

I never understood the problem Singapore had with overhead cables. In some of the nicest cities in world there are tram and trolley cables: the Ring road in Wien, city center in Bern, Roma, Milano, Lisboa, St Petersburg,..
Singapore is nice but not exactly a beautiful city (no offence) and it's already full of huge lamp post, ERP post, flyover, advertisements,.. And we're not talking about a street tram but about a railway that would probably be partially underground or a least below ground level.
Is it really only for aesthetic reasons?
Anyway the rolling stock could easily have both 3rd rail and overhead supply: the Eurostar used to be like that and many trains in UK (London suburban), the Netherlands (Amsterdam Sneltram) and France (Chamonix-Martigny) use both supply.

Singapore is unique in its identity - that you cannot find something that can be emulated here anywhere in countries.

If you follow the history of dispute, Singapore did suggest to Malaysia to adopt styles of Eurostar trains as Malaysia is solo in providing rail services into Singapore.



Take your time to understand Singapore.

Winks.

[kurakura]

Originally Posted by JediAlf

For NEL - because it is underground. So the Singapore decided on overhead power lines which are cheaper than third rail to install. It is hidden in the underground.

As for CCL and DTL, they decide to return to third rail after they can access to the third rail more easily and maintain and fix them well. Winks.

based on rudimentary statistics, the overhead rail has failed quite a few times, causing service distruptions.

[ddes]

Newer metros in the world, with the exception of Shanghai, are heading towards 3rd rail because less electricity is needed to power them but the downside is that you need to place those substations closer to each other.

However, at higher speeds, because of friction, overhead lines are preferred.

For the MRT extension to Johor, thanks to our govt's preference and because of existing support infrastructure, it will be 3rd rail.

For a KL to Singapore link, high speed rails will be overhead lines, whether Singapore govt likes it or not. In UK, Eurostar trains then ran only around 160km/h with 3rd rail.

But back to the topic of MRT extension to Johor, it would be interesting to see how Woodlands station will become, because this cross-border station will, essentially become a mini CIQ and perhaps be the ultimate gateway terminal for coaches and buses to Malaysia.

The possibilities of the station itself are mind-boggling.

[Augusto]

Originally Posted by ddes

Newer metros in the world, with the exception of Shanghai, are heading towards 3rd rail because less electricity is needed to power them but the downside is that you need to place those substations closer to each other.

However, at higher speeds, because of friction, overhead lines are preferred.

There are different opinions about 3rd rail: in Paris, the Nord-Sud Metro (now lines 12 and 13) gave up the overhead cable for the 3rd rail a few decades ago. At the opposite, the western suburban network from St Lazare Station (the best in Paris) gave up the 3rd rail for overhead cable in the late 1970'.

Originally Posted by ddes

For a KL to Singapore link, high speed rails will be overhead lines, whether Singapore govt likes it or not. In UK, Eurostar trains then ran only around 160km/h with 3rd rail.

I agree.

[JediAlf]

Originally Posted by ddes

Newer metros in the world, with the exception of Shanghai, are heading towards 3rd rail because less electricity is needed to power them but the downside is that you need to place those substations closer to each other.

However, at higher speeds, because of friction, overhead lines are preferred.

For the MRT extension to Johor, thanks to our govt's preference and because of existing support infrastructure, it will be 3rd rail.

For a KL to Singapore link, high speed rails will be overhead lines, whether Singapore govt likes it or not. In UK, Eurostar trains then ran only around 160km/h with 3rd rail.

But back to the topic of MRT extension to Johor, it would be interesting to see how Woodlands station will become, because this cross-border station will, essentially become a mini CIQ and perhaps be the ultimate gateway terminal for coaches and buses to Malaysia.

The possibilities of the station itself are mind-boggling.

160km/h in Singapore on third rail is acceptable because the distance between Johor and 'Malaysia-to-decide" station in Singapore is so short. Winks.

Woodlands station would be enlarged to be an interchange for North-South Line, Thomson Line and Johor line with 3 stations located to each other. Probably bigger than Dhoby Ghaut due to the daily volume of passengers transferred.

Johor Line is likely to in elevated structure from Woodlands station.

[redstone]

Hmmm what's the advantage of 3rd rail over overhead cables?

[JediAlf]

Originally Posted by redstone

Hmmm what's the advantage of 3rd rail over overhead cables?

- low power consumption
- easier and more accessible for servicing teams to maintain/repair
- won't tangle with the electrical conductors abroad trains unlike overhead line which can tangle with the conductor of the trains
- more visual appeal

[Aranho]

Originally Posted by JediAlf

- low power consumption
- easier and more accessible for servicing teams to maintain/repair
- won't tangle with the electrical conductors abroad trains unlike overhead line which can tangle with the conductor of the trains
- more visual appeal

don't forget about the overhead cable that snapped between Outram Park and HarbourFront that caused train service disruption. third rail, i believe, didn't cause disruption to services before.

[JediAlf]

Originally Posted by Aranho

don't forget about the overhead cable that snapped between Outram Park and HarbourFront that caused train service disruption. third rail, i believe, didn't cause disruption to services before.

Overhead cable did not snap. Actually one of insulators holding the cable suddenly dislocated and loosen the cable. So the train suddenly lost power and stopped. Passengers had to walk out of the train towards Outram Park Station.

It was found that the insulator was faulty. So all insulators were inspected already.

This kind of dispute is isolated - not a issue to force authorities to choose third rail.

Third rail does have problem when there is flooding - can give massive electrical shock. This can kill passengers straightaway once water reaches the floor of trains.....

[JediAlf]

Safety matters for both third rail and overhead lines.

- third rail is usually feasible if there is proper drainage system to drain away water and prevent flooding. The line is being fenced up to prevent anybody especially kids to stray into the rail track and accidentally touch the third rail.

- if the lines are allowing people to access to rail tracks, overhead lines would be feasible.

If the separate viaducts are not feasible for MRT in Johor, they would probably have to share rail tracks with high speed trains - same rail guage - 1435 mm. Then special MRT trains would be equipped with both powers - for overhead and third rail. Not a issue.

If Singapore Government and Malaysia Government think this way, this means new Woodlands Station would be able to handle MRT train and high speed inter-city train.

Eventually, we would be able to transfer at ease to either MRT or inter-city train at Woodlands.



I hope this will happen eventually.

Winks.

[ddes]

Haha. I would like to see overhead cables snap and see what the damage it causes to a tunnel due to the release of tension.

Special MRT trains fitted to suit 3rd rail and overhead cables? Interesting proposal but it is hard to hide the pantograph. Unlike the former Eurostar trains, hiding the pantograph means a larger tunnel is required to accomodate the extra space taken on the train roof.

For the Singapore side, it will not only be a waste of money for the special rolling stock, but station roofs, depot roofs and tunnel clearances have to have their heights raised. What a waste of resources.

In case you didn't know, NEL tunnels have higher clearances than NSL and EWL meaning there's almost no way that those existing lines can accomodate overhead cables even if the Singapore govt wanted to switch.

[JediAlf]

Originally Posted by ddes

Haha. I would like to see overhead cables snap and see what the damage it causes to a tunnel due to the release of tension.

Special MRT trains fitted to suit 3rd rail and overhead cables? Interesting proposal but it is hard to hide the pantograph. Unlike the former Eurostar trains, hiding the pantograph means a larger tunnel is required to accomodate the extra space taken on the train roof.

For the Singapore side, it will not only be a waste of money for the special rolling stock, but station roofs, depot roofs and tunnel clearances have to have their heights raised. What a waste of resources.

In case you didn't know, NEL tunnels have higher clearances than NSL and EWL meaning there's almost no way that those existing lines can accomodate overhead cables even if the Singapore govt wanted to switch.

No. Pantograph is for Malaysia section where they have overhead lines in place.

So when MRT trains reach Malaysia, they would raise pantograph on the roof. So the the power to train would switch from third rail to overhead. Just like what Eurostar did - they raise the pantograph when they moved out of third rail into overhead.

Actually they can lower or raise the pantograph. No need to refit the whole existing MRT systems.

[JediAlf]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56yW6k16sdE

Old London station - Waterloo which was using third rail. Notice that the train was not using overhead power line when it is leaving UK Waterloo Station.

When it reaches France and other European nations, it already uses overhead powerline as clearly seen in another video.

Now Eurostar trains are now based at St Pancras International using overhead powerline. This enables the trains to go faster on High Speed One (new line exclusive for high speed link to Channel Tunnel.

Winks.

Actually not new proposal. It is about compromise on both sides. Do watch the video, Commuter train leaving at same time as Eurostar train...

[JediAlf]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MMNlsatk18

Eurostar using overhead powerline outside UK.

[JediAlf]

Originally Posted by ddes

Haha. I would like to see overhead cables snap and see what the damage it causes to a tunnel due to the release of tension.

You won't see cables snapping easily. Extremely low chance to have overhead cables snapping. Because the cables are extremely strong to withstand any forces.

Usually there is weight attached to the cable to pull it at intervals. So tension of cables would be balanced. So insulators in intervals would support the cables. Winks.